“Deva does have the background to be an ideal UNSG, even if he is not an ideal UNSG candidate. His accomplishments in areas of sustainable development, humanitarian assistance and European-Asian relations are remarkable. His own cosmopolitan heritage speaks well to what the post of UNSG should reflect…”

Nevertheless, there seem to be some very real obstacles to Nirjan receiving a nomination with the security council: Sri Lanka has already nominated Mr. Dhanapala, and Mr. Deva-Aditya is a British citizen and an EU parliamentarian.

As Dr. Hamilton and unsg.org both pointed out, there are a couple of possible scenarios in which Nirjan could advance, but articulating the challenges to Mr. Deva-Aditya’s success shouldn’t be perceived as an attack on him. It sounds more like a reality check to me.

Finally, if anyone’s comments are distasteful and undervaluing of this site - yours are. There is no need for personal attacks.

On the procedural issue, Niranjan would in an ideal world be nominated by Sri Lanka, the country of his birth, and with which he still has very solid ties (see www.nirjdeva.com/international). Sri Lankans are very proud of his achievements on the international stage, and the Bhuddists have given him the title of “Vishwa Keerthi Sri Lanka Abhimani” for his services to Sri Lanka. However, some considerable time ago, before Niranjan had even thought of standing for UNSG, the previous government had nominated Mr.Dhanapala.

It would not be in the interests of the United Nations for these circumstances to deprive the Organisation of the opportunity to consider, and if thought fit select, Niranjan Deva-Aditya as its Secretary-General.

Niranjan is reluctant to stand against Dhanapala while Dhanapala is the sole candidate nominated by Sri Lanka, but the rules of procedure as set out in the letter dated 2nd June 2006 from the President of the Security Council to the President of the General Assembly would entitle Sri Lanka to have two candidates. It is arguable that Sri Lanka ought to endorse them both, because they are so different that support for one is not likely to detract from the other. This would give Sri Lanka a better overall chance.

Sri Lanka is not in a position to block Niranjan. The Rules would entitle any other member-state to nominate him if necessary, and it is now looking quite likely that one or more of them will do so at the right time.

It is true that Niranjan has been a member of the UK Parliament, and is now a member of the European Parliament – facts of which he is rightly proud and does not seek in any way to deny. He is nevertheless very much an Asian, and as Secretary-General he would of course have resigned his membership of Parliament. Unlike the other candidates he is not standing in the national interest of any country, nor is his campaign funded by the taxpayers’ money of any country.

The fact that he comes from a democratic country, and has himself been elected to two Parliaments, is of considerable importance at this time. It is surely unthinkable in this democratic age that the next Secretary-General should not have democratic credentials. It is also becoming clear that the UN should not have another UN insider to succeed Kofi Annan as its leader.

Niranjan Deva-Aditya has been “globalised” - he is a man of the East who has a thorough knowledge of the ways of the West, and a son of the developing world who has achieved enormous influence in the developed world. He would as you rightly say, make an ideal Secretary-General, and it would be a tragedy for the United Nations if procedural issues were to prevent him being considered.

From the office of Niranjan-Deva-Aditya

Davel